HOME | DD
MTriton — Sniper Rifle Revolver
Published: 2010-09-03 05:48:23 +0000 UTC; Views: 13661; Favourites: 111; Downloads: 2146
Redirect to original
Description
I had this crazy idea while walking back to my car last night after class. Please let me know what you think.7.62 NATO
6 round drum
This rifle has been redesigned: [link]
Related content
Comments: 28
I really like the concept; in the long run it would be, for all intents and purposes, an automatic rifle, and you wouldn't sacrifice any power because it doesn't rely on springs to chamber the next round as , say, th berret. So when it comes to accuracy, power, and distance it would be a great design. My only hang up is that judging by the barrel it's made for serious distance so i'm not sure a 7.62 nato round is giving it justice; it looks like it could handle more. However that leads into my next critisism; the design of the wood stock would make the recoil 30 times what it could be. the reason the wood in wooden rifles is so hick is because it absorbs the recoil, making it easier to shoot (In otherwords it wont tare your arm off or break from the repetitive shock) but this design looks frankly too flimsy, based on it's thickness, length of the stock and the round the gun packs, it is likly to break after 1-3 shots. Perhaps if you added suport to the inside of the wood connecting to the barrel it would keep better structure but it wouldn't help the recoil much.
Beyond that though i really like the concept and i love the design, just that structuraly speaking it wouldn't be my first choice. Point of fact i'm not even sure i would choose it on account of the fact i wouldn't be able to rely on it. Understand, i mean no disrespect, i really do like the concept and design.
I'd be very much interested to hear what you think about this though, please write back if you would be so kind.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You have valid arguments and appreciate that you, unlike other individuals on this site, present them in a respectful manner. I think what most people forget in the end when they're having these long arguments such as the one you may have noticed above is that, first and foremost, art is ART... and sketches that were drawn during three hour chemistry lectures are not always a masterpiece of engineering. Thank you for your comments. I always enjoy hearing what people think of my work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
no problem, old chap!~ ^o^
lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The design has potential. The problem i am running into is the losing of the pressure due to the barrel not being sealed against the brass. The way i propose to fix this is a small lever that you pull to slide the round up through the cylinder so that is seals against the barrel. You could really make it in 2 modes, carbine (less accurate and lower muzzel velocity) and "sniper" (more time to work the lever for the brass).
Also think about a 7.62 x 54R round.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Enjoyable. This is the most questionable design, but a good one at that. It's like "That Gun" if the barrel was sawed off then replaced with a longer one, and wooden stock attached to the back. Sorry for describing what you made.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Send me one. I'll give you something incredibly valuable for one.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I possibly forsee a handgun variant of this beauty?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Interesting idea. I may have to work on that. Here's another one. How about a high caliber revolver which fits into the stock?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
If you removed the under rail thingy, the visible barrel and the stock, you'd already have a real cool looking revolver.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
When I was looking at this originally I was picturing it without the stock, shortened barrel, and handguard removed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I love the design of this sniper revolver, great work on the receiver area, and the stock and grip are beautiful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you. I was pleasantly surprised about how the wood came out.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is awesome Great job.
I agree with LM on the barrel.
and with the fwd grip being so flimsy and the bipod Indirectly being mounted to the barrel would definitely affect accuracy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'd say over all you have a nice concept here. The only issue that the other 2 overlooked is your choice of caliber. A cylinder will not work with a tapered/necked cartridge. Due to the pressure from detonation, the case will stick to the walls of the chamber, which is why an extractor claw is needed to rip them our of semi and bolt action rifles. If you changed the specs from 7.62 NATO, to 7.62 something else, that would be a custom revolver round, you'd be better off. Just remember, straight case!
The only other issue I have, which they both also overlooked, is how one would assemble the fire control group? If the stock is milled from a solid piece of wood, how do you get the components into the stock, and also, how does the stock manage recoil? The stock in my opinion is dangerously thin around the meat of the gun, where failure is almost a guarantee.
Like they both said though, amazing concept, just needs the mechanical flaws worked out.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
As a theory for the stock, could the bulk of it be a solid milled piece with a hole drilled through from front to back and a steel rod mounted inside to sort of suck up the recoil, instead of the wood? Or would that over all weaken the stock somehow?
I also didn't think of the ammo actually... how does being tapered make the case expand any differently than a straight case? (I really can't think of why it would >.<)
As for getting the control group in that's another good point... but 'if' my steel rod idea would infact work it could become a multi part stock that split in two near the control area but stayed solid for the rear majority of the stock.
If the underrail is attached to the barrel it is no longer freefloating, and the underrail would have to be securely mounted to the barrel, due to its thinness, if it's going to support the weapon through the bipod (or the users hand for that matter) otherwise it would just bend and flex. If it's simply resting on the barrel then it poses the chance to slide forward and back along the barrel, if that happened while the user was adjusting aim it would be a large problem.
"With normal rifles, the barrel rests in contact with the stock. If the stock is manufactured of wood, environmental conditions or operational use may shift alignment of the stock, which may cause the barrel to shift its alignment slightly over time as well, altering the projectile flightpath and impact point. Contact between the barrel and the stock also interferes with the natural frequency of the barrel, which can have a detrimental effect on accuracy in some cases. The interference of the stock with the barrel's forced oscillation as the bullet passes down the bore can cause the barrel to vibrate inconsistently from shot to shot, depending on the external forces acting upon the stock at the time of the shot. Micro-vibrations acting during the bullet's passage result in differences in trajectory as the bullet exits the bore, which changes the point of impact downrange.
A free-floating barrel is one in which the barrel and stock are designed to not touch at any point along the barrel's length. The barrel is attached to its receiver, which is attached to the stock, but the barrel "floats freely" without any contact with other gun parts, other than the rifle's sights. This minimizes the possible mechanical pressure distortions of the barrel alignment, and allows vibration to occur at the natural frequency." ~ [link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The reason rifle rounds are necked is because of the higher pressures that result from the explosion. The taper helps th extractor pry the spent case out of the chamber. With straight-cased rounds, they are not designed to contain the same pressures, and generally contract back to size , which is why they are easily pushed out of a revolver with the ram pin. Basically you'd been to smash the ram pin on something really hard if you planned on extracting 7.62x51mm cases out of a revolver cylinder lol.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ooo so the effective difference is that tapered cases stay expanded while straight cases expand then contract back to normal size?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, but that is more of a side effect of the different pressures that each design is made to handle.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Gotcha...
So while it might be dumb since a new straight case could be designed just as easily as a cylinder with the shape to use a tapered one, couldn't you just fill a tapered case with less(powerful/amount) powder so the pressure would be less? Or burn slower or something else to lower the pressure.
Like I said, silly, but I wonder if it's doable...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yep, that's very possible, it just reduces the effect of the 7.62 round.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cool, I love theories.
Now using the same bullet a straight case would have to be much longer to keep the same amount of power as a normal 7.62 case yes? (For more powder / keeping the same amount of powder in a larger area)
Otherwise converting to a straight case will diminish the effect anyway.
So really which is easier? Converting the case or using less powerful powder?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd go with less powder. Keeps things a lot simpler lol.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Very nice MT.
I just got back from a gun-show and saw the new Judge Carbine Revolver they made.
Was thinking the whole time of how badass revolver riflers are But how there never made into actual firearms, that being fresh in my mind I saw this baby.
Dont mind LMs comments much.
Malachi here cant understand a floating barrel ,let alone correct firearm component labeling.
LOL theres no forward mount Thats just the normal rail, And if he referred to the Under rail Then its just called Under rail.
Even then It doesn't appear to be a rail,But more of a counter weight to balance the weapon, Who knows its your call.
As for his "Opinion" on the Flex Funny barrel
The Barrel Will not "flex funny" when used ,After all its a 6 cylinder 308 Win revolver. Not like its a full auto MG42 at 1200 RPS
Over heating (also being a range weapon semi automatic) is unlikely And no such warping will occur.
I can tell you from my experience, I shoot my rifle all the time and it never flexed funny Its metal not rubber, It just gets hot
Gets really hot But never warps, & thats a normal covered barrel of Semiautomatic fire Not a fee float barrel like this.
As for hammer It can all just be internal.
Bi pods do look a bit small But there all the same, A debate on there size is all personal likings.
Only thing that bothers me is the trigger shape, Is flat thats a fact So to some it may be awkward to pull & may lead them to belive there finger would slip off.
As LM said, Is a great looking weapon , The effort to sculpt that stock would be impressive & that barrel with the fact its a revolver design would make it a very durable & accurate rifle to use.
Would sure be a great weapon to use, But sadly those who make firearms are not that creative when it comes to looks.
Still needs a name
Firearm - [Enter Name Here]
Caliber - 7.62x51mm / .308Win
Weapon Type - Revolver Rifle
Operation - Double Action
Capacity - 6 Shot Cylinder
Loading - Swing out cylinder
Stock - Thumb Hole
Barrel - Free Floating Barrel
Scope - [Unknown]
Looking good now.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Beautiful sir
From a working standpoint I see the forward mount for the underrail being an issue, I'd move it back to the end of the silver bit, otherwise the barrell will flex funny when it heats up. And does it have a hammer or other way to access an internal hammer?
And I'd beef up the connection for the bipod.
From a looks standpoint it's beautiful and I wouldn't change a thing ^.^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The hammer is internal and can be accessible from the right side where the cocking leaver is located, near the trigger finger for simple and quick access. The bipod simply got whittled down over a series of retraces. I didn't notice how flimsy it appeared until it was colored. Thanks for your input.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, hammer works out just fine then, and you're welcome
👍: 0 ⏩: 0